Both the European Union （EU） and China are culturally, economically, climatologically and environmentally diverse polities. The EU is a multi-state grouping of economically developed democratic countries, while Chin...Both the European Union （EU） and China are culturally, economically, climatologically and environmentally diverse polities. The EU is a multi-state grouping of economically developed democratic countries, while China is a unitary sovereign state and a developing economy with a strong government bureaucracy. Our hypothesis is that given their diverse political systems, the EU and China would develop different kinds of systems for the governance of adaptation to climate change. We test this hypothesis through a comparative analysis of policy documents from the two study areas, in which we examine framework policies, programmatic actions and specific actions that have been adopted to date in order to address climate change, with a specific focus on the water sector. We find that climate change adaptation began to be addressed through formal policy on a similar timeline in the two regions. The EU and China are also similar in that they use framework laws and existing sectoral policy, such as for the water sector. We find that the EU has primarily relied on integration of climate change adaptation concerns through legal instruments which set a framework for implementation of adaptation policy. In China, specific actions to be incorporated in socio-economic development plans under the existing legislation on adaptation have been the main mode for integrating adaptation into sectoral actions, though the future trend may be to develop more regulations.展开更多
Since the United States refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol in 2001, the European Union （EU） has prominently become the leader in global climate politics. However, since fighting climate change is an issue of provi...Since the United States refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol in 2001, the European Union （EU） has prominently become the leader in global climate politics. However, since fighting climate change is an issue of providing global public goods and each country has incentive to free ride, why has the EU chosen to lead the fight against climate change？ This paper reviews three major explanations in existing literature, which includes special moral and risk preferences, political strategy and comparison of mitigation benefits and costs. Borrowed from Thucydides＇ honor, fear, and interest argument, this paper provides a comprehensive explanation for the incentives affecting a country＇s behavior. Furthermore, due to the characteristics of climate change, a country ＇S climate strategy should be understood through analyzing its position in worm economy. Therefore, the EU＇s enthusiasm in global climate politics can be explained by its dependence on foreign fossil fuels, pressure from other member countries during the EU＇s integration process and its competitive advantage on non-fossil fuel energy. For these reasons, this paper argues that trade position is a key factor in understanding Europe＇s climate strategy.展开更多
基金supported by the National Basic Research Program of China(2010CB428401)the Special Fund for Climate Change of the CMA(CCSF-09-16)
文摘Both the European Union （EU） and China are culturally, economically, climatologically and environmentally diverse polities. The EU is a multi-state grouping of economically developed democratic countries, while China is a unitary sovereign state and a developing economy with a strong government bureaucracy. Our hypothesis is that given their diverse political systems, the EU and China would develop different kinds of systems for the governance of adaptation to climate change. We test this hypothesis through a comparative analysis of policy documents from the two study areas, in which we examine framework policies, programmatic actions and specific actions that have been adopted to date in order to address climate change, with a specific focus on the water sector. We find that climate change adaptation began to be addressed through formal policy on a similar timeline in the two regions. The EU and China are also similar in that they use framework laws and existing sectoral policy, such as for the water sector. We find that the EU has primarily relied on integration of climate change adaptation concerns through legal instruments which set a framework for implementation of adaptation policy. In China, specific actions to be incorporated in socio-economic development plans under the existing legislation on adaptation have been the main mode for integrating adaptation into sectoral actions, though the future trend may be to develop more regulations.
文摘Since the United States refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol in 2001, the European Union （EU） has prominently become the leader in global climate politics. However, since fighting climate change is an issue of providing global public goods and each country has incentive to free ride, why has the EU chosen to lead the fight against climate change？ This paper reviews three major explanations in existing literature, which includes special moral and risk preferences, political strategy and comparison of mitigation benefits and costs. Borrowed from Thucydides＇ honor, fear, and interest argument, this paper provides a comprehensive explanation for the incentives affecting a country＇s behavior. Furthermore, due to the characteristics of climate change, a country ＇S climate strategy should be understood through analyzing its position in worm economy. Therefore, the EU＇s enthusiasm in global climate politics can be explained by its dependence on foreign fossil fuels, pressure from other member countries during the EU＇s integration process and its competitive advantage on non-fossil fuel energy. For these reasons, this paper argues that trade position is a key factor in understanding Europe＇s climate strategy.
